Is It Time To Consider The Commandment "Be Fruitful And Multiply" Fulfilled?

[krsnaraja]

This week, there has been a lot of stories (at least from media I follow) regarding the U.N. estimate that the World now has 7 billion people. I don't start many threads here, and I am surprised that no one else picked up the ball and has been interested in getting this subject up for discussion.

A couple of centuries ago, Thomas Malthus made a dire prediction of what would eventually happen to England and the rest of the world some time in the future. Malthus concluded that population increases exponentially and cannot be stopped from increasing before a major brings it to an end. I was listening to a podcast of the Australian ABC Religion show over the weekend. On this week's episode: Multiplication, Host Dave Rutledge asks if it's time for religious leaders around the world to stop encouraging their flocks to keep having large families.

Some of the points touched on in the show include the U.N. projecting world population to continue increasing at least till 2050. Some analysts observing the growing accumulating problems hampering continued increase in food production totals -- droughts, floods, topsoil loss and related soil degradation, and growing water scarcity in food-producing regions, are even wondering if the present number of 7 billion can be sustained for much longer.

Some of the guests...at least one Catholic Bishop interviewed, seem completely out to lunch and totally oblivious to an impending crisis -- the bishop argues that shrinking family size in the developed world is the greater concern. But there are others who at least realize that many places in the world are in trouble. Up till now, religion has been a force for maintaining the status quo, or even trying accelerate population growth. Can the World's major religions shift their goals and teachings to tell their people to stop at 2 children per family?

Another issue that is touched on and should have been given more detail, is that the problems associated with human impact on the environment are not based solely on population numbers. For example, America - with only 300 million of that 7 billion, uses more than one quarter of the World's energy and natural resources; so the ecological footprint of the average American is much bigger than the farmer in sub-sahara Africa! The problem with resource consumption issues is that the trend up till now, has been for the rest of the world to try to catch up to U.S. and western consumption levels, rather than for the developed nations to do much about reducing their impact on the environment!

The conclusion from many leading ecologists, who are trying to determine what sustainable levels of resource use, energy use, and population would be, is that both world population and consumption of renewable and non-renewable resources is mere decades away from collapse, and need to be reduced in the future.
7 Billion and Counting: Welcome to a Planet With Population Overload and Resources in Crisis [With Photos From National Geographic]

Can you count how many aquatic animals living in the ocean or how many animals on land living side by side with human beings? For every aquatic & land animal killed by man incarnates into a human being. That`s the reason for our growing population ( 7 billion)!

 

[work in progress]

I always find it funny how we deal with things when it's on the brink of being a catastrophy instead of dealing with it right away, or at least prevent it.

According to some of the stuff I've read of late from research on behaviour, we are hardwired to put immediate and short term needs ahead of longterm benefits or harmful consequences. My concern is that the capital investments needed to change to renewable energy sources and build public transit to compensate for what will be a steady decline in private automobile ownership, will not be made in time, because the money has already been wasted trying to suck the last drops of oil out of the tar sands and shale deposits.

Well personally I already think that there's enough people on Earth. We just need to try to encourage people (in a positive manner) that having 2 kids is enough. We also would need to find a way to spend ressources in a more clever way.

It doesn't seem to be the direction the thread wanted to go, but my original intention was to focus on the Religion Online episode's question of what role organized religion can and should play in the debates about family planning and birth control. A lot of church leaders have played an obstructive role if anything, arguing against birth control and even the basic premise of women having a choice regarding how many babies to have. If the clerics want to get on the right side of the population issue, they can do it. That broadcast didn't mention Iran, which cut women's access to birth control after the Ayatollah Khomeini took over; yet were able to reinterpret their scriptures when it became necessary to cut birth rates because of overcrowded cities and social chaos from the sharp spike in population that started in the 80's.

It also bugs me that people are starving and such, just because they live in another country... We are all Earthlings and ressources should be shared with everyone. T_T Makes me sad.

It is hard to get people to take in the message that what happens now in one part of the world reverberates across the globe. If there is a large scale famine, there are mass migrations of people, and civil wars over territory. I have already come to the conclusion that many of the wealthiest and most powerful players in this world are aware of these crises, but have chosen the fortress mentality -- that they will just build their own, well protected islands of wealth as the rest of the civilization collapses. But one thing they can't factor into their calculations is that there are thousands of nuclear warheads out there, and no one knows if they could end up being used.

 

[Father Heathen]

For people. Sorry we are not going to fly off into the stars in our magical space vehicle The Enterprise with Captain Han Solo and his first mate Dr. Spock. That's all science fiction. It's fiction, not reality.

The potential colonization of Earth's moon and Mars (and maybe even its moons) isn't exactly comparable to Star Trek. But anyway, upon what do you base your doubt? Also, do you happen to be one of those who believe that the moon landing was faked? Just curious.

 

[work in progress]

Can you count how many aquatic animals living in the ocean or how many animals on land living side by side with human beings? For every aquatic & land animal killed by man incarnates into a human being. That`s the reason for our growing population ( 7 billion)!

I suppose this was intended in jest, but there seem to be a lot of "souls" lost in the world's oceans today:
Deep-Sea Fish in Deep Trouble: Scientists Find Nearly All Deep-Sea Fisheries Unsustainable


Overfishing...which is connected with the related problems in agriculture and population increase, along with the degradation of the ocean environment through pollution and rising ocean acidification because of global warming -- are all combining to cause the collapse of most ocean species.

 

[Father Heathen]

Nature usually deals with population problems eventually; disease and famine, for example.

 

[work in progress]

We actually need synthetic meat. That will be cheaper still.

Synthetic meat would be potentially more efficient, and remove the horrible ethical problems...if you've ever worked in a slaughterhouse...but it still requires converting plant food to animal food. It may be a better ratio than the standard 10 to 1 conversion provided by factory farming, but if more people could go vegan, that would be the best solution.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

The potential colonization of Earth's moon and Mars (and maybe even its moons) isn't exactly comparable to Star Trek. But anyway, upon what do you base your doubt? Also, do you happen to be one of those who believe that the moon landing was faked? Just curious.

Of course I believe the moon landing happened, I am not stupid. Unlike you I am look at the whole picture and base my doubts on reality, we have political and economic realities to contend with some of which prevent us from progressing further as a species. If you want to live in your little fantasy world where there are no political or economic realities that need to be address then by all means do so.

And while your living in that fantasy world, don't forget to wear your helmet, take your coloring book and box of crayons. I think your short bus has arrived

 

[Magic Man]

Of course I believe the moon landing happened, I am not stupid. Unlike you I am look at the whole picture and base my doubts on reality, we have political and economic realities to contend with some of which prevent us from progressing further as a species. If you want to live in your little fantasy world where there are no political or economic realities that need to be address then by all means do so.

And while your living in that fantasy world, don't forget to wear your helmet, take your coloring book and box of crayons. I think your short bus has arrived

What's with the attitude? You made an outrageous claim, and you were asked where it came from. You still haven't supported it either. Do you have any real reason for doubting that we'll make it to the point of colonizing places like the moon, or just this drivel? The fact is with the advances we're making, despite all of the other troubles we're having here, it's likely that within the next 100-150 years, we'll be able to start branching out to places like the moon. If you have an actual reason for doubting that, please provide it, and dispense with the uncalled-for and misplaced insults.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

What's with the attitude? You made an outrageous claim, and you were asked where it came from. You still haven't supported it either. Do you have any real reason for doubting that we'll make it to the point of colonizing places like the moon, or just this drivel? The fact is with the advances we're making, despite all of the other troubles we're having here, it's likely that within the next 100-150 years, we'll be able to start branching out to places like the moon. If you have an actual reason for doubting that, please provide it, and dispense with the uncalled-for and misplaced insults.

I made the outrageous claim? The outrageous claim is that we are going to traipise throughout the universe in space ships when there is no guarantee we will make it to the next 100 years.

And if people insult me, I will give as good as I get.

 

[Magic Man]

I made the outrageous claim? The outrageous claim is that we are going to traipise throughout the universe in space ships when there is no guarantee we will make it to the next 100 years.

The outrageous claim is that there's no possible way we'll ever move into space. If you can't support it, that's fine. Just don't insult others for asking you to support such a ridiculous claim.

And if people insult me, I will give as good as I get.

OK, but when, as in this case, someone doesn't insult you, you should probably lay off the insults.

 

[Father Heathen]

Of course I believe the moon landing happened, I am not stupid. Unlike you I am look at the whole picture and base my doubts on reality, we have political and economic realities to contend with some of which prevent us from progressing further as a species. If you want to live in your little fantasy world where there are no political or economic realities that need to be address then by all means do so.

And while your living in that fantasy world, don't forget to wear your helmet, take your coloring book and box of crayons. I think your short bus has arrived

Calm yourself, princess.

 

[Father Heathen]

The outrageous claim is that we are going to traipise throughout the universe in space ships

Can you quote where someone suggested this?

And if people insult me

And can you quote where you were insulted?

Yeah, I thought not.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Calm yourself, princess.

Don't patronize me

 

[Photonic]

I am not being pessimistic, I am only stating the fact and keeping real.

Real to who? Reality is a big thing, do you know all of it? Is that something you wish to claim?

It was once considered "real" that humans could never fly by any means.

 

[work in progress]

What's with the attitude? You made an outrageous claim, and you were asked where it came from. You still haven't supported it either. Do you have any real reason for doubting that we'll make it to the point of colonizing places like the moon, or just this drivel? The fact is with the advances we're making, despite all of the other troubles we're having here, it's likely that within the next 100-150 years, we'll be able to start branching out to places like the moon. If you have an actual reason for doubting that, please provide it, and dispense with the uncalled-for and misplaced insults.

Actually, I'm doubting it myself -- even though I've been a lifelong sci fi and space junkie. For one thing, since the end of the Cold War, the space program has been put on the backburner. And lunar and interplanetary space travel will depend on government funding. Private enterprise does not put money on any venture that does not promise profitability within five years.

And when it comes to colonies -- whether on the Moon, Mars, or those space colonies, like the L5 cylinders proposed by Gerald O'Neil -- the only closed system biosphere experiments on Earth have ended in failure so far. Creating a living ecosystem seems to be a bigger, more complex problem than just throwing some plants and animals together in a giant greenhouse!

But, the biggest problem is that timeline you mentioned -- 100 to 150 years. What if we don't have 100 years to make it happen? I'm not saying everyone's going to be dead a century from now, but these looming problems with global warming and the decline of cheap oil and other cheap energy sources, are going to make financing big, bold ventures like space colonies extremely difficult in the future. Heck, we may even be running out of time to fund infrastructure spending needed to deal with the effects of climate change.

 

[not nom]

Colonization of Titan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to Cassini data from 2008 Titan has hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth. These hydrocarbons rain from the sky and collect in vast deposits that form lakes and dunes. "Titan is just covered in carbon-bearing material—it’s a giant factory of organic chemicals," said Ralph Lorenz, who leads the study of Titan based on radar data from Cassini. “This vast carbon inventory is an important window into the geology and climate history of Titan.” Several hundred lakes and seas have been observed, with each of several dozen estimated to contain more hydrocarbon liquid than Earth's oil and gas reserves. The dark dunes that run along the equator contain a volume of organics several hundred times larger than Earth's coal reserves.

Radar images obtained on July 21, 2006 appear to show lakes of liquid hydrocarbon (such as methane and ethane) in Titan's northern latitudes. This is the first discovery of currently-existing lakes anywhere besides Earth. The lakes range in size from about a kilometer to one which is one hundred kilometers across.

Titan 'sea' (left) compared at scale to Lake Superior (right)

I'm not sure if that sounds great or depressing... we're such junkies

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Colonization of Titan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I'm not sure if that sounds great or depressing... we're such junkies

So you're going to fly your spaceships using carbon based fuels? Good luck.:biglaugh:

 

[not nom]

So you're going to fly your spaceships using carbon based fuels? Good luck.:biglaugh:

no, but we could build our SUV race tracks there! "New Texas", woo.

for general space travel within a few generations, I think mass delusion is the safest bet..

which analogously would suggest personal delusion for personal transport!

[youtube]lp_PIjc2ga4[/youtube]
Elektronik Supersonik - Zlad - - YouTube

easy peasy.

 

[not nom]

So you're going to fly your spaceships using carbon based fuels? Good luck.:biglaugh:

but actually, I think the idea would be to bring that stuff here? which seems rather ridiculous as well. by the time we would be able to do that, we would need to have sorted our energy problems out anyway ^^

I think the problem with earth / overpopulation isn't "too little space", but sheer resource usage/abuse. if it was about living space, we might as well settle in the ocean first (yay, and then the ocean dies)...

 

[CynthiaCypher]

but actually, I think the idea would be to bring that stuff here? which seems rather ridiculous as well. by the time we would be able to do that, we would need to have sorted our energy problems out anyway ^^

I think the problem with earth / overpopulation isn't "too little space", but sheer resource usage/abuse. if it was about living space, we might as well settle in the ocean first (yay, and then the ocean dies)...

Now you are getting the picture. I agree with James Lovelock who developed the Gaia Hypothesis "The inertia of humans is so huge that you can't really do anything meaningful." We are just too stupid, so nothing great like flying off into the sky or even fixing what we broke is ever going to happen.